Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

MLK's organized protesters weren't documented gaking in the street though.

Just sayin'.

Nope they were not. I just find it amusing that the Founding Fathers and Civil Rights/MLK movements as justification for the action of OWS

Monster Rain wrote:MLK's organized protesters weren't documented gaking in the street though.

Just sayin'.

They may not have been documented doing it, but I can virtually guarantee that public defecation happened. Its pretty much guaranteed at any large public gathering.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:Nope they were not. I just find it amusing that the Founding Fathers and Civil Rights/MLK movements as justification for the action of OWS

The ultimate justification is that their message is politically popular.

The message is lost when protest with intent became the norm. Do you believe the message is any stronger today then say..like two weeks ago? Its an individual question on how you view the message now. To me they had a somewhat message at first but then they lost their credibility when protest with intent wnt norm.

I don't care one way or the other, but then I'm petite bourgeoisie, so I'll be fine in almost all foreseeable circumstances. Though I do think that a protest founded in anti-consumerism and socialism is unlikely to gain traction in the US, regardless of how well founded. US citizens like their conception of freedom, and rarely enjoy having it challenged, much as is the case everywhere.

Jihadin wrote:Maybe some people need to look up the laws that MLK were trying to change?

Maybe some people lack historical perspective, and aren't aware that he was dismissed and insulted and disregarded in much the same way as the OWS folks. I doubt many (maybe not any) of the OWS folks are any match for MLK's genius or nobility of spirit, but then it's not as if the entire civil rights movement was made up of tens of thousands of MLKs. It's mostly ordinary people, who may be silly or foolish or do dumb things sometimes, but have a degree of passion and willingness to stand up in public and complain.

Rosa Parks was also arrested, of course. Her famous protest was breaking a law.

People aren't trying to shoot the OWS protesters, nor are they all a member of a minority which was forcibly removed from their home continent to work as slave labor.

Just sayin'. Comparing the Civil Rights movement and Martin Luther King Jr to these guys is insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement. The fact that there is no one single consensus on what it is they're actually "protesting" makes it, to my eye at least, quite clear that while it may have started out as one thing it has degenerated into a free for all of ideological shenanigans.

Kanluwen wrote:People aren't trying to shoot the OWS protesters

Rubber bullets? What about the marine who had is skull cracked.. as a result of being shot by a police officer with a teargas grenade launcher?


I found this to be a good read http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/25/shocking-truth-about-crackdown-occupy

Crablezworth wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:People aren't trying to shoot the OWS protesters

Rubber bullets? What about the marine who had is skull cracked.. as a result of being shot by a police officer with a teargas grenade launcher?

Which is it? A tear gas launcher or rubber bullets?

One of these things is not like the other. "Rubber bullets" are still entirely capable of causing serious harm at short ranges.
Tear gas launchers are NEVER supposed to be aimed at people. They're fairly solid canisters, with quite a bit of heft to them, launched at a relatively decent velocity. If they hit someone in the head at a close range--it will cause damage.


But hey. It's not like cops can use pepper spray, since that's so "inhumane".

I found this to be a good read http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/25/shocking-truth-about-crackdown-occupy

Oh really? You're going to use the Brandon Watts goon as an example?

For those who don't know: Watts had been arrested and removed four separate times during the OWS protests. Once for starting a fight, once for trying to set a fire in the park bathroom and subsequently "escaping" from the police van where he was being held until his parents came to pick him up. After that one, he was warned not to return or he would be taken into custody for violating a community sentence. The last time(before he was injured fleeing police--dumbass ran into a tree after stealing a hat from an officer, throwing a brick and then fleeing with a "witness" claiming that police slammed his head repeatedly into the concrete. Look at that photo and tell me that looks like someone who has suffered blunt force trauma from repeated contact with concrete and not just some moron who ran facefirst into something) was for stealing a barricade while "disguised" as a city worker and then trying to throw it at someone.

That article is one of the worst written pieces I've read. It's worse than the one on wired.com about how "dangerous" pepper spray is and how "militarized" police departments are.

They're uneducated, idiotic opinion pieces that make you realize exactly why the public is so easily riled up against the police. All it takes is a few words about "brutality" and it's suddenly the Third Reich up in here.

Kanluwen wrote:People aren't trying to shoot the OWS protesters, nor are they all a member of a minority which was forcibly removed from their home continent to work as slave labor.

Just sayin'. Comparing the Civil Rights movement and Martin Luther King Jr to these guys is insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement. The fact that there is no one single consensus on what it is they're actually "protesting" makes it, to my eye at least, quite clear that while it may have started out as one thing it has degenerated into a free for all of ideological shenanigans.

No, it is not insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement. It is in the same tradition and it is in the same spirit of non-violence. MLK was assasinated for his role in the Civil Rights movement. Just sayin'.

Radiation wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:People aren't trying to shoot the OWS protesters, nor are they all a member of a minority which was forcibly removed from their home continent to work as slave labor.

Just sayin'. Comparing the Civil Rights movement and Martin Luther King Jr to these guys is insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement. The fact that there is no one single consensus on what it is they're actually "protesting" makes it, to my eye at least, quite clear that while it may have started out as one thing it has degenerated into a free for all of ideological shenanigans.

No, it is not insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement.

Yes. It is. It's also insulting to compare them to the Founding Fathers, before you want to go into it.

It is in the same tradition and it is in the same spirit of non-violence.

No, it's not. It's "in the same tradition" insofar as they're "non-violent"(which they haven't been, as protesters HAVE been starting up violence). But you know what else is non violent?

The majority of how these protests have been broken up. There's what, 5-600ish at some of these protests?

If this, in fact, was a police state we'd have people vanishing. We'd have families being suddenly "vacated" from their homes as banks foreclose on them, etc etc.
This is pure and simple demonstrative nonsense. Most of the people are my age and have no clue what the feth kind of protections they are actually granted under the First Amendment.

MLK was assassinated for his role in the Civil Rights movement. Just sayin'.

I know you're not trying to say that anyone has been assassinated for their speeches at Occupy Wall Street.

You cannot possibly be saying that, or remotely believe that.

Radiation wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:People aren't trying to shoot the OWS protesters, nor are they all a member of a minority which was forcibly removed from their home continent to work as slave labor.

Just sayin'. Comparing the Civil Rights movement and Martin Luther King Jr to these guys is insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement. The fact that there is no one single consensus on what it is they're actually "protesting" makes it, to my eye at least, quite clear that while it may have started out as one thing it has degenerated into a free for all of ideological shenanigans.

No, it is not insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement. It is in the same tradition and it is in the same spirit of non-violence. MLK was assasinated for his role in the Civil Rights movement. Just sayin'.

Here is what I said. Read it again.

And I suggest you read my statement again.

Comparing this movement to the Civil Rights movement is downright asinine. No one is being killed for their beliefs. At worst, you've got officers who have no business being officers.

But you know what? That goes down to "you reap what you sow".
Police officers get afforded, by and large, virtually no respect when they are in the process of executing the law when it is inconvenient to us. We're fine with it and laud them for it whenever it's in a clear-cut, black and white situation like a robber breaking into an old lady's home. But when it's students being removed from an area for an illegal protest--they're "fascists".

Kanluwen wrote: "militarized" police departments are.

they are

Radiation wrote:MLK was assasinated for his role in the Civil Rights movement. Just sayin'.

Your point? MLK was assassinated by a bigot for being black.

Kanluwen wrote:And I suggest you read my statement again.

Comparing this movement to the Civil Rights movement is downright asinine. No one is being killed for their beliefs. At worst, you've got officers who have no business being officers.

But you know what? That goes down to "you reap what you sow".
Police officers get afforded, by and large, virtually no respect when they are in the process of executing the law when it is inconvenient to us. We're fine with it and laud them for it whenever it's in a clear-cut, black and white situation like a robber breaking into an old lady's home. But when it's students being removed from an area for an illegal protest--they're "fascists".

It is not asinine to compare the current non-violent movement to the Civil Rights movement. It is asinine to think there is no comparison.

AustonT wrote:

Kanluwen wrote: "militarized" police departments are.

they are

They always have been, despite what the Andy Griffith show wants us to believe.

The only difference has been that different techniques have been utilized.

AustonT wrote:

Kanluwen wrote: "militarized" police departments are.

they are

Radiation wrote:MLK was assasinated for his role in the Civil Rights movement. Just sayin'.

Your point? MLK was assassinated by a bigot for being black.

MLK was assassinated for his role in the Civil Rights movement.

Radiation wrote:
It is not asinine to compare the current non-violent movement to the Civil Rights movement. It is asinine to think there is no comparison.

It's also a fallacious argument to state that because they have one thing in common(and not even entirely in that regard), they are in the same category or should be regarded the same.

Kanluwen wrote:

Radiation wrote:
It is not asinine to compare the current non-violent movement to the Civil Rights movement. It is asinine to think there is no comparison.

It's also a fallacious argument to state that because they have one thing in common(and not even entirely in that regard), they are in the same category or should be regarded the same.

It's not fallacious in this case.

Kanluwen wrote:

Radiation wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:People aren't trying to shoot the OWS protesters, nor are they all a member of a minority which was forcibly removed from their home continent to work as slave labor.

Just sayin'. Comparing the Civil Rights movement and Martin Luther King Jr to these guys is insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement. The fact that there is no one single consensus on what it is they're actually "protesting" makes it, to my eye at least, quite clear that while it may have started out as one thing it has degenerated into a free for all of ideological shenanigans.

No, it is not insulting to MLK and the Civil Rights movement.

Yes. It is. It's also insulting to compare them to the Founding Fathers, before you want to go into it.

I don't think the comparison of OWS to MLK is any more inappropriate than the comparison of MLK to the Black Panthers, they're both protest movements so its apt. Though, honestly, OWS reminds me more of Vietnam protests than anything else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:
It's also a fallacious argument to state that because they have one thing in common(and not even entirely in that regard), they are in the same category or should be regarded the same.

No it isn't.

Kanluwen wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Kanluwen wrote: "militarized" police departments are.

they are

They always have been, despite what the Andy Griffith show wants us to believe.

The only difference has been that different techniques have been utilized.

The ability to hang the collar "paramilitary" on the police's neck is a recent phenomena. You can believe what you like but starting at least in the 60's and building especially through the "war on drugs" the police have transformed from locally recruited notably non professional keepers of the public faith to a professional force distinctly set apart from the public.

Radiation wrote:
MLK was assassinated for his role in the Civil Rights movement.

I don't see why that's relevant to the conversation at all.

I've been attacked on the basis of my species.

Does that mean that a coyote is prejudiced?

Kanluwen wrote:I've been attacked on the basis of my species.

Does that mean that a coyote is prejudiced?

No, but only because its a Coyote and prejudice isn't a meaningful concept (so far as we know) with respect to coyotes.

AustonT wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Kanluwen wrote: "militarized" police departments are.

they are

They always have been, despite what the Andy Griffith show wants us to believe.

The only difference has been that different techniques have been utilized.

The ability to hang the collar "paramilitary" on the police's neck is a recent phenomena. You can believe what you like but starting at least in the 60's and building especially through the "war on drugs" the police have transformed from locally recruited notably non professional keepers of the public faith to a professional force distinctly set apart from the public.

Police have ALWAYS been a militarized organization.

You've been able to see that on the basis of them traditionally having "ranks" and "uniforms", along with a "basic standard of training and fitness".

It's only since the 60s and onwards that people started complaining about it. I've always found it amusing that the 1970s marked the beginnings of the "Community Policing Era", when it was also a time when police were fairly universally scorned.

The "locally recruited notably non professional keepers of the public faith" part is ridiculous to mention. It hasn't been like that since the days of the Bow Street Runners and the shift from what is called the "Political Era"(marked by a noticeable tie between local politicians and police officers, who even then were "uniformed officers in paramilitary-style organizations") to the "Reform Era" in 1930 to the 1970s.

Dogma wrote:I don't think the comparison of OWS to MLK is any more inappropriate than the comparison of MLK to the Black Panthers, they're both protest movements so its apt. Though, honestly, OWS reminds me more of Vietnam protests than anything else.

My problem is the comparison of what they're representing. MLK and the Civil Rights Movement had a goal. They had an outlined ideology, methodology, and they took steps to distance themselves from the more radical elements.

OWS seemingly doesn't give a crap. It's the Tea Party all over again.

Dogma wrote:No it isn't.

Yeah. It is, at least in this context.

It is purposely constructing a misleading argument on the basis of a false assumption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I've been attacked on the basis of my species.

Does that mean that a coyote is prejudiced?

No, but only because its a Coyote and prejudice isn't a meaningful concept (so far as we know) with respect to coyotes.

Sure it is.

I mean, if MLK's death at the hands of a known white supremacist for his part in organizing and spearheading the Civil Rights movement can be likened to a 22 year old(with four arrests at Zucatti Park, with Watts knowing that he would actually be arrested and taken into custody if he showed up again and started any trouble) miscreant getting his face busted running into something while fleeing from police (who by all accounts, were not really "curbstomping face into concrete" mad), I don't see how a prejudiced coyote doesn't fit in this wildly careening train running off the logic track.

Kanluwen wrote:
My problem is the comparison of what they're representing. MLK and the Civil Rights Movement had a goal. They had an outlined ideology, methodology, and they took steps to distance themselves from the more radical elements.

Sure, Civil Rights was a far better organized protest movement than OWS is, but they're still both protest movements and therefore comparable.

Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah. It is, at least in this context.

It is purposely constructing a misleading argument on the basis of a false assumption.

The truth value of argumentative premises has no bearing on the validity of the argument. Logical validity is determined by internal consistency.

Kanluwen wrote:
Sure it is.

I mean, if MLK's death at the hands of a known white supremacist for his part in organizing and spearheading the Civil Rights movement can be likened to a 22 year old(with four arrests at Zucatti Park, with Watts knowing that he would actually be arrested and taken into custody if he showed up again and started any trouble) miscreant getting his face busted running into something while fleeing from police (who by all accounts, were not really "curbstomping face into concrete" mad), I don't see how a prejudiced coyote doesn't fit in this wildly careening train running off the logic track.

No it isn't. Prejudice is a human concept, coyotes aren't human, ergo prejudice has no relevance to coyotes.

Compare this to MLK who was a human political activist that suffered as a result of pursuing his political agenda. The kid basically did the same thing, though you might not consider his political agenda to be laudable.

Stop dreaming up comparisons to have problems with. There are many direct and valid comparisons to be made. You just won't look for them.

Kanluwen wrote:Comparing this movement to the Civil Rights movement is downright asinine.

Agreed.

It shows a serious lack of perspective to even countenance the idea. Two words: "Attack dogs."

EDIT: I just went and re-read the accounts of the Birmingham Bombing... I've changed my mind. Comparing the Civil Rights movement to this pack of savages in OWS isn't asinine. It's absolutely offensive.

I don't think we'll get through to Kan on this, but kudos to everyone who is still trying. My views:

Police HAVE become more militarized.

OWS IS comparable to other protests, demonstrations, and social movements of the past and present.

OWS DOES have a message: the system must provide for greater social and economic justice.

Rubber bullets, tear gas, and pepper spray are NOT the way to handle peaceful demonstrations.

Monster Rain wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Comparing this movement to the Civil Rights movement is downright asinine.

Agreed.

It shows a serious lack of perspective to even countenance the idea. Two words: "Attack dogs."

EDIT: I just went and re-read the accounts of the Birmingham Bombing... I've changed my mind. Comparing the Civil Rights movement to this pack of savages in OWS isn't asinine. It's absolutely offensive.

It is asinine to think there are no comparisons to be made and your sensibilities are easily offended.